Contracts Keyed to Murphy
Bohac v. Department of Agriculture
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Petitioner appealed her termination from her job as a research geneticist with the United States Department of Agriculture to the Merit Systems Protection Board. She alleged that her termination violated the Act, which was designed to protect government employees from being fired for revealing embarrassing information about the department that employs them. Petitioner asked for $14,021.32 for pecuniary damages and was awarded this amount. Petitioner asked for $150,000.00 non-pecuniary damages for emotional and physical suffering, loss to her personal and professional reputation, and damage to her family life. The Administrative Judge for the Merit Systems Protection Board, who heard her appeal denied Petitioner’s claim for non-pecuniary damages. He interpreted the relevant section in the Act to not include non-pecuniary damages. Petitioner appealed to the full board, which also denied her claim for non-pecuniary damages.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.